Week 10
This is of the 1st track in the made and played album, the original 4’33’’. There is no musical sound, so it is weird that you can see al these dominant chords. If you know how I can change the scale/colours, let me know; I want the plot to be as realistic as possible. I did not had enough time to put a story of what I did in the codes; because my portfolio decided to stop working; so I had to rewrite the whole document and I almost decided to drop this course, because 1 week went well with the homework so far.
week 10
These are the 1st till 7th and 10th of the made and played track. No8 and No9 did not work. I do not know why. Same story as the other one of these week. If you know how I can make all the plot the same length and width, please let me know; I tried something and it did not work.
Introduction
My corpus is in reversed order! I will fix this, after week 11.
Dear Reader,
For this project, I want to analyse different versions of the musical piece: 4’33’’ by John Cage. 4’33’’ is a piece made by John Cage. It is not my favourite song, but it questions perfectly what music is and what it can be. I am interested in which information I can get about the different versions, by analysing it with Rstudios. That is why I made a playlist with different versions of 4’33’‘. In 2010, John Cage released a new album with different versions of 4’33’’ (he died in 1992, so I do not know whether he made it, but it is in his spotify). I will also use that playlist.
I also would like to compare this song with another extreme song or a genre which is the opposite, but I cannot think of a song or genre. If you know something, it would help me a lot!
Kind regards, Lucius Groot
week 9?
I do not know what happened, but my work after week 9 stopped with working and I am stressing right now.
Here is my comparison for track 1 till 7 and 10 with a structure analysis of the playlist in which only John Cage is credited on Spotify.
- Is the original, you can see that it exist out of 3 parts. Track 3 is the closest (if you follow the big lines) in form to track 1. The other tracks are just all over the place and some of them could be a total different piece.
Edit: Track No. 1 decided to disappear, so it is 2 till 7 and 10, i do not know how i should fix this.
Week 9 sceptrogram
You can see very clear in mapbjc1 that there is a magnitude of 0 around c01. c02 has the highest magnitude overall.
mapbjc track 2, 6, 10 and 4 in order of most to least have a similar magnitude aroung c02. It is noticable tht there is a magnitude around c03 in track 3 and 7. Track 5 could again be another piece.
week 8
Week 8 part2
I do not know what I can conclude from the mapbjc tracks; but apparently every 4’33’’ has its own key; while I cannot hear a key if I am listening.
week 7
In week 7, I experiment with different codes. You can see what my results are in the following tabs:
Summary of the lists
# A tibble: 1 × 12
mean_speechiness mean_acousticness mean_liveness sd_speechiness
<dbl> <dbl> <dbl> <dbl>
1 NA NA NA NA
# ℹ 8 more variables: sd_acousticness <dbl>, sd_liveness <dbl>,
# median_speechiness <dbl>, median_acousticness <dbl>, median_liveness <dbl>,
# mad_speechiness <dbl>, mad_acousticness <dbl>, mad_liveness <dbl># A tibble: 1 × 12
mean_speechiness mean_acousticness mean_liveness sd_speechiness
<dbl> <dbl> <dbl> <dbl>
1 0.180 0.234 0.316 0.180
# ℹ 8 more variables: sd_acousticness <dbl>, sd_liveness <dbl>,
# median_speechiness <dbl>, median_acousticness <dbl>, median_liveness <dbl>,
# mad_speechiness <dbl>, mad_acousticness <dbl>, mad_liveness <dbl># A tibble: 1 × 12
mean_speechiness mean_acousticness mean_liveness sd_speechiness
<dbl> <dbl> <dbl> <dbl>
1 0.0417 0.445 0.204 0.0279
# ℹ 8 more variables: sd_acousticness <dbl>, sd_liveness <dbl>,
# median_speechiness <dbl>, median_acousticness <dbl>, median_liveness <dbl>,
# mad_speechiness <dbl>, mad_acousticness <dbl>, mad_liveness <dbl># A tibble: 1 × 12
mean_speechiness mean_acousticness mean_liveness sd_speechiness
<dbl> <dbl> <dbl> <dbl>
1 NA NA NA NA
# ℹ 8 more variables: sd_acousticness <dbl>, sd_liveness <dbl>,
# median_speechiness <dbl>, median_acousticness <dbl>, median_liveness <dbl>,
# mad_speechiness <dbl>, mad_acousticness <dbl>, mad_liveness <dbl># A tibble: 1 × 12
mean_speechiness mean_acousticness mean_liveness sd_speechiness
<dbl> <dbl> <dbl> <dbl>
1 NA NA NA NA
# ℹ 8 more variables: sd_acousticness <dbl>, sd_liveness <dbl>,
# median_speechiness <dbl>, median_acousticness <dbl>, median_liveness <dbl>,
# mad_speechiness <dbl>, mad_acousticness <dbl>, mad_liveness <dbl># A tibble: 1 × 12
mean_speechiness mean_acousticness mean_liveness sd_speechiness
<dbl> <dbl> <dbl> <dbl>
1 NA NA NA NA
# ℹ 8 more variables: sd_acousticness <dbl>, sd_liveness <dbl>,
# median_speechiness <dbl>, median_acousticness <dbl>, median_liveness <dbl>,
# mad_speechiness <dbl>, mad_acousticness <dbl>, mad_liveness <dbl>The summary I let Rstudio made of my lists: It is possible to make a summary of 4’33’’, but not if there are too many songs in one playlist.
Valence/Energy/Mode
I want to know of both the lists: Valence versus energy + the mode
I will have to reconsider the setting of the plots.
Valence/Energy/Mode in a smoothcurve
I want to know of both the lists: How can there be a key? What makes that there are different energies and how can some be negative?
The code of the homework week 7
I took some inspiration of the homework for my longest code ever
Histogram of the lists
The histogram I made about both the lists:
nothing special